An Argument against the Existence of God from Imperfection in the World, reprinted below:
The argument goes as follows:
(1) If the creator of the world, i.e., God, is perfect, then the world that the creator created is essentially perfect.
(2) The actual world is not essentially perfect.
(3) The actual world was not created by the creator who is perfect. – from (1) and (2).
(4) Therefore, the actual world has no its creator. – from (2) and (3).
(5) Therefore, God does not exist. – from (4).
This argument is simple. It begins with some imperfect matters in the actual world that can be observed by us. We can ask as follows: “Why did a perfect being create such an imperfect world?” This actual world is the definite evidence for the non-existence of God because it is essentially imperfect.
My comments on this post are as follows:
Why is it beyond the power of a perfect being to create something that is imperfect? That is, if a being cannot perform a certain action, such as create something imperfect, then is he not imperfect himself by merit of being unable to do such?
That, and the idea of “perfect” is a very iffy concept to rely on, in any regard. Who’s to say that our world is not perfect? No good definition of perfect has thus far been put forth that would settle the matter.
In my estimation, rational arguments both for and against the existence of God are necessarily doomed to failure. The meaning of the word “belief” attests to this. Both the choice to believe and the choice to not believe are fundamentally irrational, through and through. This is not bad, but it is a useful distinction to keep in mind, nonetheless.
In addition to those, I think it can be said that 4 does not follow from 2 and 3. If anything, it only follows that the world does not have a perfect creator, but premise 1 is not very sound, as I argue above.
EDIT FOR CLARIFICATION: When I say “the choice to not believe,” I am referring to those who claim that it can be deductively proved that there is no God. I am not labeling suspension of judgment, or agnosticism, as irrational. In a way, suspension of judgment is, in fact, the only rational position to take. Again, this is not to say that rational decisions are superior to irrational decisions, but simply to note the distinction.